[U-Boot] [PATCH 01/18] spl: improve spi configuration

[Nikita Kiryanov <nikita@compulab.co.il>]

On 05/08/14 17:11, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 05, 2014 at 03:28:04 PM, Nikita Kiryanov wrote:
>> On 03/08/14 16:44, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On Sunday, August 03, 2014 at 09:34:31 AM, Nikita Kiryanov wrote:
>>>> Currently we can define CONFIG_SPL_SPI_<any parameter except SPI MODE>.
>>>> Define CONFIG_SPL_SPI_MODE option, and provide a default value for
>>>> backwards compatibility.
>>>> Default values are also provided for the rest of the spi_flash_probe
>>>> parameters (like we do in cmd_sf), to help with config file brevity.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nikita Kiryanov <nikita@compulab.co.il>
>>>
>>> You might actually be even more bold and check if you cannot fall back to
>>> the CONFIG_DEFAULT_SPI_MODE etc. What do you think ?
>>
>> Not a fan of the idea. It will:
>> - Complicate the #ifdefs
>> - Complicate the relationship between CONFIG_DEFAULT_SPI_* and
>>     CONFIG_SPL_SPI_* #defines
>> - Not get much use: most boards do not #define CONFIG_DEFAULT_SPI_*
>>     values in the config files, and of the ones that do, only two
>>     (dra7xx_evm and cm_fx6) use SPI in SPL.
>
> On the other hand, it's now only a matter of time until we get CONFIG_TPL_SPI_*
> m which gives us _another_ set of defines. So the question is -- what is your
> proposition to keep the amount of new ad-hoc defines low and cater for this
> case?

OK I think I may have misunderstood your suggestion. You wanted to
replace CONFIG_SPL_SPI_* #defines with CONFIG_DEFAULT_SPI_* #defines,
not use both, right?
Based on cursory grepping, this seems possible, though I think
CONFIG_SF_DEFAULT_* is a better candidate.

I'll prepare a patch..

>
> Best regards,
> Marek Vasut
>